Regarding your point 4, if that research has not already been done, it needs to be.

Patriarchy probably has more to do with why women may be so uptight about sex, as they are punished both physically and emotionally if they act ‘slutlike.’

This is the opposite of the trend instigated by radical feminism–which may explain the increase in aggression in some modern societies. For example, the freeway systems of California.

More available sex might go a long way toward mitigating human violence.

Michelle: great question. There are many relevant implications. Let me propose a few:
1) The role of our environment in influencing our behaviors, vs. the usually accepted more genetic-based “determinism“
2) The importance of ensuring virtuous, positive feedback loops.
3) And, yes, this example suggests that expanding the role of females in a society may create a more harmonious atmosphere…perhaps calling for more females in top business and political ranks?
4) In terms of the ” introduction of women workers into once male-dominated occupations”, it would be fascinating to compare the culture of three types of occupations: a) mostly male, b) balanced male/ female, c) mostly female. What would you say?
5) Finally, a purely personal speculation along the lines that genetics is not fate…: who is exhibiting more of those “female” traits in this US political campaign?

(No wonder Charleston Heston bemoaned the fate of the white traditional male role, geesh, it doesn’t stand a chance!)

How much can these observations of primate culture be extrapolated to human?